0
Started By
Message
re: A clearer picture regarding LSU and the rumors around private equity is emerging
Posted on 8/9/26 at 7:30 pm to Jster15
Posted on 8/9/26 at 7:30 pm to Jster15
Yeah, at the current TV revenue levels laid out in the original post 7% would return a little over $5 million per year. A little over 5% annually: I can’t think that is too attractive for a $100 million investor. But double the TV revenue, double the return, and $10 million per year would be much more attractive.
This post was edited on 8/9/26 at 7:33 pm
Posted on 8/9/26 at 7:34 pm to lsupride87
quote:They likely don’t have a politically palatable choice. That’s how you get smart people making terrible deals. Because Gov. Landry having to backtrack and dip into government budget reserves or increase taxpayer spending to pay buyouts and player salaries is about the only “solution” that would go over worse, and that’s the outcome otherwise.
Can 40 really successful people all simultaneously make a bad deal while it was all so simple SEC rant posters had it all figured out? I doubt it
Posted on 8/9/26 at 7:45 pm to Jster15
Posted on 8/9/26 at 7:49 pm to dstone12
quote:
LSU Sold off 10% of their program to. PrivEq! Dumbasses. “ -Ole Miss & Alabama posters.
Well if it is somehow true LSU is loaddd red with dumbasses.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 7:50 pm to Demosthenian
LSU went on binge and fired:
Scott Woodward: $6 million buyout
Matt McMahon: $8 million dollar buyout
Brian Kelly: $54 million buyout.
And kept it going hiring:
Lane Kiffin: $91 million ($72 million guaranteed; $13 million this season)
Will Wade: $30 million ($22.5 million guaranteed; $4 million this season)
NIL for football and basketball this season: $42-50 million
Profit sharing: $20 million
6+8+54+13+4+42+20 = 147
This year’s LSU buyouts, salaries, NIL, profit sharing: $147 million.
That doesn’t even include the cost of assistant coaches.
And that’s just for football and basketball. And probably $10 million too conservative on NIL. There is still baseball, women’s basketball, gymnastics, softball… on and on. More expenses.
Scott Woodward: $6 million buyout
Matt McMahon: $8 million dollar buyout
Brian Kelly: $54 million buyout.
And kept it going hiring:
Lane Kiffin: $91 million ($72 million guaranteed; $13 million this season)
Will Wade: $30 million ($22.5 million guaranteed; $4 million this season)
NIL for football and basketball this season: $42-50 million
Profit sharing: $20 million
6+8+54+13+4+42+20 = 147
This year’s LSU buyouts, salaries, NIL, profit sharing: $147 million.
That doesn’t even include the cost of assistant coaches.
And that’s just for football and basketball. And probably $10 million too conservative on NIL. There is still baseball, women’s basketball, gymnastics, softball… on and on. More expenses.
This post was edited on 8/9/26 at 8:34 pm
Posted on 8/9/26 at 7:55 pm to captdalton
Why did they fire McMahon? Couldn’t they have hired Wade after this year? Was he leaving NC State? That would have saved them $25M.
This post was edited on 8/9/26 at 7:56 pm
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:04 pm to OleVaught14
quote:
OleVaught
Is seriously interested in LSU’s football future.
I totally understand it considering OM has already made a sizable contribution by giving us the best coach they’ve had in 60 plus years.
This post was edited on 8/9/26 at 8:05 pm
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:04 pm to OleVaught14
quote:
They need the $100 mil up front. If it was just about investing and getting returns, they would invest the media payout themselves into a basic SP500 fund (which has out returned the average PE Fund over the last year, 5 years, 10 years, and 20 years). They just need the up front cash
Yeah, that’s what you’d do and lose your a$$ more times than win. Look up present value of a future cash flow
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:12 pm to LSU4Life2021
quote:
Look up present value of a future cash flow
That is essentially what the last four pages have been arguing over.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:12 pm to SidewalkTiger
We haven’t even gotten into the long-term implications of transferring media rights into a private entity that can be sold off.
This structure is essentially what FIFA proposed doing (right after the WC ended last month) that everyone immediately denounced.
Even if it’s just this 9% that’s sold, you’ve introduced a lot of unknown variables:
• there’s now an outside influence at the negotiating table alongside other schools’ at the next round of media negotiations, that at the least can create friction when attempting to get LSU to agree to proposals
• A critical point of a sale of the entity’s equity, in addition to the 7% profits interest distribution—to be clear they can be completely de-linked—is a repurchase obligation for this new entity to buy out Williams after [x] years (or, less likely, a re-sale privilege). This is a mechanism to ensure Williams has another pathway to earn his cost of capital, and can create major, major headaches between parties down the road. Like, usually results in litigation to force agreeable settlement terms. So LSU is signing itself up for years of friction with this new structure
• once you’ve divested the asset from the university, the strategy how to preserve and grow that asset can get completely divorced form the productive larger mission. New licensing agreements for LSU’s media properties, increased efforts to advertise and market LSU to create supplemental revenue streams, and sales of media, among other ideas, all create conflicts for potentially raising ownership and privacy concerns from those shown in the content, and media ownership disputes
• the sheer existence of an entity that could now be a place for LSU to sell future valuable assets to in related party deals (it’s much easier once those channels are established), are all really significant concerns that this structure is opening LSU to be exposed to / suffer down the road.
This is a complete Pandora’s box of issues how you ruin a once-proud, once-valuable, civic asset.
This structure is essentially what FIFA proposed doing (right after the WC ended last month) that everyone immediately denounced.
Even if it’s just this 9% that’s sold, you’ve introduced a lot of unknown variables:
• there’s now an outside influence at the negotiating table alongside other schools’ at the next round of media negotiations, that at the least can create friction when attempting to get LSU to agree to proposals
• A critical point of a sale of the entity’s equity, in addition to the 7% profits interest distribution—to be clear they can be completely de-linked—is a repurchase obligation for this new entity to buy out Williams after [x] years (or, less likely, a re-sale privilege). This is a mechanism to ensure Williams has another pathway to earn his cost of capital, and can create major, major headaches between parties down the road. Like, usually results in litigation to force agreeable settlement terms. So LSU is signing itself up for years of friction with this new structure
• once you’ve divested the asset from the university, the strategy how to preserve and grow that asset can get completely divorced form the productive larger mission. New licensing agreements for LSU’s media properties, increased efforts to advertise and market LSU to create supplemental revenue streams, and sales of media, among other ideas, all create conflicts for potentially raising ownership and privacy concerns from those shown in the content, and media ownership disputes
• the sheer existence of an entity that could now be a place for LSU to sell future valuable assets to in related party deals (it’s much easier once those channels are established), are all really significant concerns that this structure is opening LSU to be exposed to / suffer down the road.
This is a complete Pandora’s box of issues how you ruin a once-proud, once-valuable, civic asset.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:19 pm to SidewalkTiger
I do believe that buried in here somewhere is a way to take AD funds and use them to generate more funds than the institution would be able to create on its own.
I have every faith that LSU and the state of Louisiana will absolutely frick this up, though. It's what they do when money is involved.
I have every faith that LSU and the state of Louisiana will absolutely frick this up, though. It's what they do when money is involved.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:30 pm to SidewalkTiger
So LSU will spend 9-20 percent less in order to divert money into long term investments that will generate money long term but they need to perform short term and win and spend as much as everyone else so they don’t lose 4 games.
I’ve got some news. You are going to lose if you don’t spend as much as everyone else on average.
This sounds like a way to have built in excuses for losing.
My only question is if you’re going to intentionally do this, why not go all in and build the investment fund in one or two years.
Fifty percent three years in a row. This seven percent stuff just keeps you perpetually 7 percent behind everyone.
I’ve got some news. You are going to lose if you don’t spend as much as everyone else on average.
This sounds like a way to have built in excuses for losing.
My only question is if you’re going to intentionally do this, why not go all in and build the investment fund in one or two years.
Fifty percent three years in a row. This seven percent stuff just keeps you perpetually 7 percent behind everyone.
This post was edited on 8/9/26 at 8:34 pm
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:37 pm to TheTideMustRoll
quote:
I have every faith that LSU and the state of Louisiana will absolutely frick this up, though. It's what they do when money is involved.
Based on the history of Louisiana politics someone likely goes to prison.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:39 pm to captdalton
Sure sounds like it was going to be exactly what everyone thought 10% to private equity for $100M and once there was all the negativity about it they are trying to come up with some other plan. Feel like this is the 2nd of 3rd different "leak" about what it actually is.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:43 pm to geauxbrown
quote:
seriously interested in LSU
It's just fascinating to watch how this has gone from selling 10% to a select group of LSU boosters who will always put LSU's interests first to selling 20% to anyone who is willing to invest and how LSU fans are convinced this is a good thing.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:57 pm to OleVaught14
quote:
how LSU fans are convinced this is a good thing.
Who?
Posted on 8/9/26 at 8:57 pm to SidewalkTiger
Posted on 8/9/26 at 9:00 pm to captdalton
quote:
Door three, after thinking more about this is my current guess. Investor invests $100 million. LSU spends $25-35 million this year to make up this year’s shortfall.
It's hard for me to believe they need that money this year because there's really no guarantee this actually happens or is even legal.
So what is the backup plan? Just don't pay Lane? Also, if LSU is in that bad of trouble, why did the NIL pot go up after Lane was hired (due to donations), that money could've went toward digging LSU out of this immediate hole.
quote:
Next season the investor recoups 7% on that interest money ($250,000) + 7% of TV revenues ($5 million). It would take him 19 years to recoup his investment. But in 2028 TV revenue increases to $108 million. His share jumps $2.5 million - to $8 million. In 2031 TV revenue increases to $143 million. His share jumps another $2.5 million - he makes over $10 million and over 10% on his initial investment. He recoups his investment in approximately 12 years, faster if TV contracts keep growing.
LSU would be better served getting a loan in this scenario.
Posted on 8/9/26 at 9:01 pm to SidewalkTiger
quote:Every single dipshit that nega-posted and downvoted my comments in my prior thread about this, including you
Who?
Posted on 8/9/26 at 9:04 pm to Demosthenian
quote:
Every single dipshit that nega-posted and downvoted my comments in my prior thread about this, including you
I can disagree with you and still think some, or all, of this is a bad idea.
Some of you seem to keep getting confused by that.
Page 4 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News